Judgment :- (Petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents/colleges to admit the petitioners to the MBBS Course for the academic year 2005-2006 pursuant to PEC/CENTAC/MBBS/2005 dated 27.09.2005.) Common Order: P. Sathasivam, J. Since the relief sought for in all these Writ Petitions is identical, they are being disposed of by the following common order. 2. Heard Mr.V.Vijayshankar, Mr.P.Raja, learned counsel for petitioners; Mr.T.Murugesan, Government Pleader (Pondicherry); and Mr.Sriram Panchu, Senior Counsel for R-4 and R-5/private colleges. 3. In these Writ Petitions, the petitioners pray for the issuance of a writ of mandamus or an appropriate direction, directing the respondents to admit the petitioners to the MBBS Course for the academic year 2005-2006 pursuant to the letter third respondent/Centralised Admission Committee (CENTAC), Education Department, Government of Pondicherry. 4. For convenience, we shall refer to the case of P. Vignesh/petitioner in W.P. No.37582 of 2005. 5. According to the petitioner, he appeared for the Joint Entrance Examination conducted by the CENTAC/third respondent for admission to the Professional Course for the year 2005-2006. He was informed that he was selected for the MBBS course to the Pondicherry Institute of Medical Science (PIMS), viz., 4th respondent. He was further directed to report to the college authorities on 26.09.2005. As directed by the CENTAC, the petitioner reported on 26.09.2995 and he was asked to come on 2 7.09.2005. Again, on 27.09.2005, he was asked to come on 29.09.2005 along with prescribed fees. Even on 27.09.2005, the Government had taken up the matter with 4th and 5th respondent colleges, directing them to accommodate the petitioner and other students. However, the college authorities refused to admit him and others. The 4th and 5th respondent colleges and the Pondicherry Linguistic and Religious Minority Medical and Dental Colleges Welfare Association had earlier approached this Court seeking for a declaration that they are entitled to fill the medical/dental s on their own without resorting to the merit list of the CENTAC. The said Writ Petitions were disposed of with a direction to follow the merit list published by the CENTAC. On appeal, the Supreme Court also directed those Institutions, viz., R-4 and R -5, to strictly fill the seats in the management quota from the merit lists published by the Government. The said Writ Petitions were disposed of with a direction to follow the merit list published by the CENTAC. On appeal, the Supreme Court also directed those Institutions, viz., R-4 and R -5, to strictly fill the seats in the management quota from the merit lists published by the Government. After disposal of the SLPs, the Government had sponsored the names of 80 students, viz., 40 each to the 4th and 5th respondent colleges, as per the merit list maintained by them towards the management quota seats. Most of them have been admitted by said colleges. It was for the remaining 20 seats, viz., 10 each to the 4th and 5th respondent colleges, when names of the petitioners along with other candidates were sponsored, the colleges refused to admit them. Due to the said action, the Government had filed two contempt Petitions viz., 941/05 and 942/05, as against respondents-4 and 5/colleges. Since correct picture was not projected, this Court directed the colleges to fill the balance 10 + 9 seats respectively in the 4th and 5th respondent colleges with religious linguistic minority candidates on the basis of the merit lists maintained by the CENTAC. Unfortunately, correct information regarding the petitioner and others sponsored by the Government was not placed, making this Court believe that seats were vacant in which the 2 colleges could admit minority students of their own. Though the petitioner and others filed Sub Applications in the Contempt Application, the same were dismissed. In such circumstances, having no other remedy, the petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Similar claim has been made by other Writ Petitioners seeking for a direction to the respondents to admit them into the MBBS Course for the academic year 2005-2006. 6. It is unfortunate that though the petitioners were selected for the academic year 2005-2006 by the CENTAC and their names were forwarded to respondents-4 and 5, due to various reasons, they were not admitted by them. 7. Separate but identical counter affidavit filed by the Under Secretary to Government, Department of Health, Government of Pondicherry, on behalf of respondents-1 to 3, supports the stand taken by the petitioners. 8. 7. Separate but identical counter affidavit filed by the Under Secretary to Government, Department of Health, Government of Pondicherry, on behalf of respondents-1 to 3, supports the stand taken by the petitioners. 8. It is seen from paragraph No.9 of the counter affidavit that the CENTAC on 27.09.2005 had sponsored 10 more students each including the petitioners under management quota to both medical colleges after assessment of vacant seats till t The college management had not admitted the students on the plea that contempt petition is pending in the High Court. As rightly pointed out by Mr.Vijayshankar, in view of the fact that respondents-4 and 5 did not comply with the directions of the third respondent (CENTAC), the Government correctly filed the Contempt Petitions before this Court and while disposing of the same on 29.09.2005, the relevant fact, viz., eligibility of the petitioners for being admitted in respondents-4 and 5 colleges, was not properly projected before the Division Bench. Unfortunately, though they filed Sub Applications in the said Contempt Petitions, in view of the fact that the Contempt Petitions were disposed of and that they are not parties to the Writ Proceedings, those Sub Applications were dismissed. Had appropriate direction been issued at the time of disposal of the Contempt Petition, all the petitioners would have been admitted by respondents-4 and 5 as per the direction of the CENTAC. 9. Now, there cannot be any direction for admission for the year 2005-2006. In normal circumstances, in view of the relief sought for, the Writ Petitions are liable to be dismissed as infructuous. However, as rightly pointed out by Mr.Vijayshankar learned counsel for the petitioners, though petitioners were selected by the CENTAC and a list containing the petitioner's names was forwarded to respondents-4 and 5, for one reason or other, respondents-4 and 5 did not consider their request and the direction of the CENTAC was not fulfilled. It is not in dispute that as per the direction of the Supreme Court out of 100 students in each college (R4 and R5), the Government is entitled to send a merit list for 50 students and the Managements are free to fulfil the remaining 50 with their Linguistic and Religious Minority students. 10. It is not in dispute that as per the direction of the Supreme Court out of 100 students in each college (R4 and R5), the Government is entitled to send a merit list for 50 students and the Managements are free to fulfil the remaining 50 with their Linguistic and Religious Minority students. 10. No doubt, after hearing the matters and reserving the same for orders, the petitioner in W.P. NO.32977 of 2005 filed an additional affidavit highlighting that, for the academic year 2005-2006, both respondents-4 and 5 admitted two students in excess, which is in violation of the mandatory directions issued by this Court. However, considering the relief prayed for in the Writ Petitions, we are not inclined to take action, yet, it is for the authorities concerned to take note of the same. In the counter affidavit of the Under Secretary, Department of Health, Government of Pondicherry, it is seen that as per the order dated 29.09.2005 of this Court, the Government supplied the list of religious and linguistic minority students. Mahatma Gandhi Medical College and Research Institute, Pondicherry, ie., 5th respondent, has admitted 10 Telugu minority candidates from the Government merit list. The 4th respondent, viz., Pondicherry Institute of Medical Sciences, Pondicherry, has admitted 10 Christian minority candidates from the Government merit list. It is also brought to our notice that as per the time schedule given by the Medical Council of India and the Hon'ble Supreme Court in W.P.(Civil) No.306 of 2004 with Nos.308 and 345 of 2004, order dated 12.01.2005 ( (2005) 2 SCC 65 ) Mridul Dhar vs. Union of India), admissions to 1st MBBS Course should be over by 30.09.2005 and thereafter, no admission can be made. It is relevant to note that according to the directions of the Supreme Court dated 05.08.2005 and 23.08.2005 and that of this Court dated 30.08.2005, the Pondicherry Institute of Medical Sciences and Mahatma Gandhi Medical College and Research Institute have admitted 40 candidates in each Institution as on 26.09.2005 without any objection. For the remaining vacant seats, CENTAC had sponsored a list of 10 candidates consisting the petitioners each to the Pondicherry Institute of Medical Sciences and Mahatma Gandhi Medical College and Research Institute for admission in MBBS Degree course under Management Quota. For the remaining vacant seats, CENTAC had sponsored a list of 10 candidates consisting the petitioners each to the Pondicherry Institute of Medical Sciences and Mahatma Gandhi Medical College and Research Institute for admission in MBBS Degree course under Management Quota. It is pointed out by the Government that, instead of admitting the candidates, the private colleges adopted delaying-in-tactics with an ulterior motive until the contempt cases came up for hearing on 29.09.2005. After hearing the plea of the private Medical Colleges, this Court directed in the order dated 29.09.2005 to fill up the remaining 20 vacant seats from the Minority community concerned available in the list of CENTAC. The counter affidavit further shows that a s per the order dated 29.09.2005, the Government had to supply additional list of candidates belonging to religious and linguistic minority groups to Pondicherry Institute of Medical Sciences and Mahatma Gandhi Medical College and Research Institute on 3 0.09.2005 itself, as this Court had directed to complete the admission process on or before 30.09.2005 in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Mridul Dhar's case (cited supra) and thereby the claim of the petitioners could not be accommodated, hence, the option given by this Court that after exhausting such minority candidates, if there is any vacant seat available, general candidates should be admitted, again on the basis of merit could not be resorted to. In view of the same, the petitioners could not be admitted in the Management Quota seats of R-4 and R-5. 11. In view of the above factual details and taking note of the direction of the Supreme Court in Mridul Dhar's case (cited supra) and also of the fact that accommodation of students over and above the permitted strength is not possible, no direction could be issued to the respondents. 12. Taking note of the fact that all the petitioners were selected by the CENTAC and in the list forwarded by them to respondents-4 and 5 for the year 2005-2006, their names find place; the attitude of R-4 and R-5/colleges; the unfortunate the petitioners was not properly projected at the time of disposal of the Contempt Petition, we issue the following directions. Inasmuch all the petitioners were selected by the CENTAC for the year 2005-2006, they could not be accommodated by R-4 and R-5; Respondents-2 and 3 are directed to verify as to the possibility/feasibility to issue similar direction to respondents-4 5 for accommodating the writ petitioners for the academic year 2006-2007. We once again reiterate that if the same is permissible as per the provisions applicable and seats are available in respondents-4 and 5 colleges and if the petitioners are still interested, they may be sympathetically considered if they are otherwise eligible for admission to the MBBS Degree Course for the year 2006-2007. 13. With the above observation, the Writ Petitions are dismissed. No costs.